Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 982 F.2d 1356 - Campbell v. Blodgett

Campbell v. Blodgett’s Empirical Analysis

982 F.2d 1356 · 1993

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
2
states following
January 2018
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably Campbell v. Wood (1994), Bittaker v. Woodford (2003)

18 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

250199320002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp. · Harris v. Nelson · Juidice v. Vail · Crateo, Inc. v. Intermark, Inc. · Ash v. Cort

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[W]e will not reverse absent a definite and firm conviction that the district court has committed a clear error of judgment.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “the perpetuation of the testimony is proper to avoid a failure or delay of justice.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[i]f an appeal has been taken from a judgment of the district court ..., the district court in which the judgment was rendered may allow the taking of the depositions of witnesses to perpetuate their testimony for use in the event of further proceedings in the district court.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.